Minister vows stricter law against people cheating farmers
2
3
Pune: Opposition targeted the state govt on the last day of the monsoon session over bogus seeds and fertilisers being sold to farmers and claimed that its action against the fraudsters was not effective, while agriculture minister Manikrao Kokate vowed to bring some stricter law to punish the unscrupulous people.
Congress MLA Vijay Wadettiwar said, "It is quite a serious issue happening across the state. Even MLAs from Mahayuti have expressed concern over it. The state has responded to the problem by appointing flying squads, but it will not address this kind of issue. The state govt will have to take some serious steps."
Calling for stricter laws to punish people involved in such crime, he said, "The farmer spends his hard-earned money to purchase seeds and fertilisers. S/he works hard to grow crops, but all efforts go in vain because of bogus seeds and fertilisers. We demand the govt to come up with stricter laws like MPID to award serious punishment to such fraudsters."
You Can Also Check:
Pune AQI
|
Weather in Pune
|
Bank Holidays in Pune
|
Public Holidays in Pune
Responding to it, agriculture minister Kokate said, "The central govt is bringing in a new law to punish people involved in such crime. If needed, the state will also take initiative to introduce a stricter law."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Judges grill Trump over use of emergency powers for 'reciprocal tariffs'
US appeals court judges sharply questioned on Thursday whether President Donald Trump's tariffs were justified by the president's emergency powers, after a lower court said he exceeded his authority with sweeping levies on imported goods. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., is considering the legality of "reciprocal" tariffs that Trump imposed on a broad range of US trading partners in April, as well as tariffs imposed in February against China, Canada and Mexico. In hearing arguments in two cases brought by five small US businesses and 12 Democratic-led US states, judges pressed government lawyer Brett Shumate to explain how the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets, gave Trump the power to impose tariffs. Trump is the first president to use IEEPA to impose tariffs. "IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them," one of the judges said. Shumate said that the law allows for "extraordinary" authority in an emergency, including the ability to stop imports completely. He said IEEPA authorizes tariffs because it allows a president to "regulate" imports in a crisis. The states and businesses challenging the tariffs argued that they are not permissible under IEEPA and that the US Constitution grants Congress, and not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. Neal Katyal, a lawyer for the businesses, said the government's justification for the tariffs amounted to "a breathtaking claim to power that no president has asserted in years." The arguments - one day before Trump plans to increase tariff rates on imported goods from nearly all US trading partners - mark the first test before a US appeals court of the scope of his tariff authority. The president has made tariffs a central instrument of his foreign policy, wielding them aggressively in his second term as leverage in trade negotiations and to push back against what he has called unfair practices. Trump has said the April tariffs were a response to persistent US trade imbalances and declining US manufacturing power. He said the tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico were appropriate because those countries were not doing enough to stop illegal fentanyl from crossing US borders. The countries have denied that claim. Shumate cited a 1975 appeals court decision that authorized President Richard Nixon's across-the board surcharge of 10% on imported merchandise to slow inflation. But that decision added that the president did not have authority to impose "whatever tariff rates he deems desirable." Shumate also said that courts cannot review a president's actions under IEEPA or impose additional limits that are not included in the law. Several judges said that the argument would essentially allow one law, IEEPA, to overwrite all other US laws related to tariffs and imports. The case is being heard by a panel of all of the court's active judges, eight appointed by Democratic presidents and three appointed by former Republican presidents. The timing of the court's decision is uncertain, and the losing side will likely appeal quickly to the US Supreme Court. TRADE NEGOTIATIONS Tariffs are starting to build into a significant revenue source for the federal government, with customs duties in June quadrupling to about $27 billion, a record, and through June have topped $100 billion for the current fiscal year. That income could be crucial to offset lost revenue from Trump's tax bill passed into law earlier this month. But economists say the duties threaten to raise prices for US consumers and reduce corporate profits. Trump's on-again, off-again tariff threats have roiled financial markets and disrupted US companies' ability to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. On May 28, a three-judge panel of the US Court of International Trade sided with the Democratic states and small businesses that challenged Trump. It said that the IEEPA did not authorize tariffs related to longstanding trade deficits. The Federal Circuit has allowed the tariffs to remain in place while it considers the administration's appeal. The case will have no impact on tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as duties on steel and aluminum imports. The president recently announced trade deals that set tariff rates on goods from the European Union and Japan, following smaller trade agreements with Britain, Indonesia and Vietnam. Trump's Department of Justice has argued that limiting the president's tariff authority could undermine ongoing trade negotiations, while other Trump officials have said that negotiations have continued with little change after the initial setback in court. Trump has set an August 1 date for higher tariffs on countries that don't negotiate new trade deals. There are at least seven other lawsuits challenging Trump's invocation of IEEPA, including cases brought by other small businesses and California. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled against Trump in one of those cases, and no judge has yet backed Trump's claim of unlimited emergency tariff authority.
The Hindu
2 minutes ago
- The Hindu
CM tells police chief to crack down on black marketing of fertilizers
Blaming the Centre's policy for the shortage of urea and Diammonium Phosphate (DAP) during the ongoing kharif season in Karnataka, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Thursday instructed Director-General and Inspector-General of Police M.A. Saleem to keep vigilance to prevent the sale of fertilizers on the black market. Despite the Central government's inaction, the State government is taking necessary steps to ensure supply of fertilizers so that farmers are not inconvenienced during the sowing season, he said. Mr. Siddaramaiah has instructed the police chief to keep a close watch on black marketeers who are trying to create a shortage of fertilizers by illegally hoarding and selling it on the black market. 'There should be no artificial shortage of fertilizers in the district, taluk, or hobli,' the Chief Minister said, and instructed the police to keep a close watch on those who are creating shortages. While the BJP accused the government of mismanaging the available stock of fertilizers, the Congress termed the BJP claims of the Centre supplying adequate quantities of urea as 'false.' On Thursday, the Chief Minister met Ministers and Congress legislators of Vijayapura, Bagalkot, Gagad, Haveri, Shivamogga, Davangere, Chitradurga, Chikkamagaluru, and Chickballapur. During three days, he met Ministers and MLAs of all districts and heard their grievances related to funds and development works.
The Hindu
2 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Malegaon blast acquittals destroyed Congress ‘conspiracy' to manufacture false narrative of Hindu terror: BJP
The acquittal of all seven accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case 'destroyed the Congress's conspiracy to manufacture a false narrative of 'Hindu terrorism' in order to stop the rise of the BJP and its leaders Narendra Modi and Amit Shah, and to appease Muslims,' the BJP claimed on Thursday (July 31, 2025). Welcoming the court ruling, the party demanded an apology from former Congress presidents Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi. It sought compensation for those acquitted and demanded that action be taken against those involved in torturing and falsely implicating them. Among the accused were former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Purohit. Also Read | It was Congress' conspiracy to malign Hindu community: Indore man discharged in Malegaon blast case 'Accused were framed, tortured' 'It was a well calculated conspiracy of the Congress party for sheer vote bank politics. We welcome the court's decision, which has once again proved that you cannot falsify the truth by your diabolical design for too long; truth has the uncanny habit of reappearing with alarming regularity,' former Union Minister and senior BJP MP Ravi Shankar Prasad said at a press conference. 'Colonel Purohit, a highly decorated army officer who fought against terrorism in Kashmir, was framed... Pragya Thakur, a very good leader, was accused of bringing a bomb on her motorcycle. She was tortured for 10 to 11 days to the extent that it became difficult for her to walk later,' he said. 'Saffron terror' Mr. Prasad said that under the Congress-led UPA regime, the then-Home Minister P. Chidambaram had spoken about 'saffron terror' at a Director-Generals of Police conference in 2012. 'Another Home Minister, Sushilkumar Shinde had also talked about 'saffron terror'. Rahul Gandhi, during a conversation with the American Ambassador, had said that 'Hindu terror is more deadly than Lashkar-e-Taiba'... It is still there in the Wikileaks files,' he said. The BJP leader recalled that he had held a press conference at that time to counter Mr. Chidambaram's remarks, and had pointed out that there was saffron in India's tricolour, and that the Indian saints also wore saffron. 'This is the colour of India's cultural and spiritual tradition, isn't it?' he said. 'Appeasement politics' Mr. Prasad cited several other instances to allege that the Congress indulged in appeasement politics. He said that a Commission appointed by the then-Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav had ruled out any conspiracy behind the fire that killed Hindu pilgrims on the Sabarmati Express at Godhra in Gujarat in 2002. In the Ishrat Jahan case, Union Home Minister Amit Shah — who was then a Minister in the Gujarat government led by Mr. Modi as the Chief Minister — was framed on the basis of two 'sold-out' witnesses and had to remain in jail for several months without any evidence, he added. The BJP leader also listed the bomb blasts on the Samjhauta Express, at the Mecca Masjid, and at the Ajmer Dargah, as well as the 26/11 Mumbai attacks cases, in support of his allegation that the Congress could go to any extent for the sake of a 'Muslim vote bank'. The attempts to build a 'false narrative of Hindu terrorism' were aimed at halting the rise of BJP, Mr. Modi, and Mr. Shah, he said.
